80Tiger

I could buy into this if it had not been for all the position moving that went on this past spring. It just sends red flags that the staff is not satisfied with our group. We are moving a proven all SEC performer at guard to a new position and by bringing in the transfers it also seems that are not satisfied with the development or quality of some of the back ups. It is bothersome that we are relying on a transfer that basically was a part time starter at best, to play guard and that either our depth at center or need to move Golson requires us to bring in another transfer at center. I have concerns about our O line.

Absolutely. On a critical 3rd and short, Derrick Thomas hit him at the line of scrimmage and Danley took him 5 yds down the field for a first.

I think it was Davis that made a killer block on the reverse for touchdown in the Brody sack game. He just plowed a guy right around the end zone.

I am with you AF. Even had his his number on my AU jersey as a kid.

As well as punt Bama punt.

I think one of the funniest things in this thread is that I read a lot of comments about SW being a very good P5 QB when he is healthy ( which he has some very good games) but then a lot of commenters seem to say Gus can't develop high school talent. So which is it? Can't be both ways.

I think you see it for a few reasons. He seems to have a lot of upside; very talented and while we are talking about it more talent than SW. Let MW get some playing time in case of JS being a one and done. Secondly it shows Fields that a freshman can play and it also creates 2 years of gap between MW and Fields if Fields comes and he is redshirted. A lot of "ifs" but just some thought behind it.

I think throughout the season you may see MW getting more mop up duty than SW.

I think I read where draftee's have until July 7th to decide. I may be wrong. That sounds like a short window.

Evidently you didn't. The statement in the first paragraph that is emphasized is as quotes "In total, the personal information of potentially near all of America's 200 million registered voters was exposed..".. That is a statement of fact. Later he changes to 198 million potential voters. Crap article with crap "facts".

Give up 64. You have given referenced information of why you think the OP info was misleading along with your commentary. The only commentary back has been to infer you did not read the article. They are making no counter argument. To paraphrase Johnny Tyler "its like talking with my brother's kids".

Reminds me of how everyone called for Comey's firing back in the fall.

Hopefully producers will also stop hiring white Ruffalo when it comes to movie casting.

All those are suppositions and not fact. It cannot be proven one way or the other whether people would have voted for him or not. It does prove that the majority of the people were looking to not vote for him and that is what happened. That is an indisputable fact.

Homer's statement was that the majority of Americans did not vote for Trump, which is true. It is also true that the majority of Americans did not vote for Clinton-twice. And when you are talking about "majorities", yes you can add the total opposition votes to indicate that a candidate did not win the majority of the votes. It's called math.